Exclusionary Rule Description

Describe the Exclusionary Rule and what it is meant to protect

the citizens of this country from. 

The exclusionary rule is a legal rule that prevents the use of

unlawfully obtained evidence in court proceedings of violation

of the constitution of the United States (Calabresi, 2013). This

evidence encompasses the evidence acquired from unreasonable

seizure or search in violation of the 4th Amendment, and other

violations regarding the fifth and sixth amendments. This rule

largely protects the citizens of this country from unreasonable

search by police officers. It is a remedy for the citizens when

police violate the citizens’ Miranda rights.

Exclusionary Rule Benefits

What are the benefits of the Exclusionary Rule? Explain.

The exclusionary rule has public, administrative and

professional benefits, if correctly balanced in its adoption. There

are several purposes and thus benefits of the exclusionary rule.

One of the key benefits of the rule is that it prevents law

enforcement from piloting seizures and searches that might be

inconsistent with the Fourth amendment (Calabresi, 2013). As

evidenced in the cases of death penalty, the rule deters

qualification of criminal activity.

Deterring police misconduct has been one of the most

pronounced benefits of the exclusionary rule. Police officers,

who are the investigators in most procedural systems, often

break rules regarding evidence acquisition. This signifies that

the police level is one that is most vulnerable in the criminal

procedure. Application of the exclusionary rule thus aids a lot in

curbing the police unprofessionalism. Indeed, it has ensured

that nobody is above the law. It prevents oppression of the

citizen from the governments by protecting their private homes,

property and family from unreasonable and unlawful

government scrutiny. Additionally, it is important to note that

the rule aids in ensuring that human rights are observed. In fact,

it is human rights law that has immensely contributed to the

development and design of the exclusionary rights such that the

rights are geared towards protecting human rights.

The rule imposes the requirement of a probable cause such that

the entity being viewed to be wrong must have done soothing

that raises suspicion of reasonable criminal act that may warrant

the issuance for collection of evidence. Therefore, it prohibits

any search of the accused without close analysis of their doings.

This minimizes falsified accusations and evidence (Calabresi,

2013). In addition, as it should be, the rule assumes innocence of

the accused before guilty. It thus gives space to the collection,

analysis and verification of the correctness and justness of the

evidence before conviction of the crime before an authorized

judge or jury.

It is potent to mention that exclusionary rule aids in upholding

the integrity of the judicial system, a vital organ on the

government of any state or country. It does this by protecting the

fundamental values of the judiciary such as justice, truth,

integrity and fairness. It prevents the courts from utilizing

tainted evidence in the process of decision making, but rather

encourages the dismissal of illegally acquired forms of proof.

The law applies to both the state and federal criminal

proceedings to ensure that the correct documentation of

evidence is adopted. It ensures protection of the fourth

amendment and promotes fair trial.

Methods of Demonstrative Evidence

Identify at least 2 methods of demonstrative evidence that would

explain the concept of best evidence. You may use scenarios to

describe the theory of best evidence. 

Demonstrative evidence illustrates or demonstrates the witness’

testimony. If it accurately and fairly reflects the testimony of the

witness and is not prejudicial but rather probative, then it is

admissible (Baier et al., 2018). Two methods of demonstrative

evidence is the use of maps, and the use of diagrams. A scenario

on point is when a witness decides to create and use diagrams of

a crime scene to create a vivid picture of how the situation was.

Similarly, the opposing counsel can produce the map of the

crime scene to prove any contrary positions. These are important

or rather the best evidence given that they create competent

evidence in description and explanation of events (Baier et al.,

2018). They illustrate and reflect the testimony of a witness.

This, alongside other evidence, is largely important in figuring

out how the crime in question took place. This makes the

decision-making process more efficient.

Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Violation

Explain to the newly appointed investigators the absolute

adherence to avoiding any evidentiary issue that would result in

a Fruit of the Poisonous Tree violation. 

The Fruit of the Poisonous Tree principle applies to both live

testimony and physical evidence that was obtained illegally

(Lemley, 2017). This includes evidence obtained directly or

indirectly from the illegal taint, except for a few distinct

circumstances. It is an extension of the exclusionary rule. As a

result of its ramifications, any evidentiary issue that results in

the violation of the doctrine cannot be admitted in a criminal

trial. It is important for newly appointed investigates to thus

adopt the absolute adherence to avoiding evidentiary issues that

may result in a Fruit of the Poisonous Tree violation since the

painstaking and resource-demanding investigation process

would be rendered useless since the evince would be

inadmissible.

An example is when a prosecution team introduces evidence

against a defendant yet the prosecution learned about the

evidence during a statement the defendant made in an earlier

illegal arrest. All the discovery of the place officers would be

ruled as the fruit of the poisonous tree. This would cost the

prosecution a lot of time, resources and effort. For a newly

appointed investigator, this may be difficult to make sense of

since the accused may seem to be wrong. Indeed, even finding

illegal things that can incriminate someone but in an illegal

search would be pure waste of time and other resources since the

evidence should not be admitted (Lemley, 2017). This doctrine

is important in keeping investigators from using evidence

obtained through the illegal activities of the law enforcement.

Ramifications and Results

Explain the ramifications and results of such a violation. Use at

least 2 scenarios to demonstrate this issue. 

A key ramification of the violation is that the prosecution would

be prevented from admitting particular evidence into a criminal

case if the evidence has been founded to be tainted by a primary

illegality (Lemley, 2017). Exclusion of the evidence from a

criminal case is the ultimate fruit of using illegally obtained

evidence.
One scenario of this is when there is an illegal interrogation that

leads to physical evidence. For instance, the case of a police

officer stopping a speeding motorist and conducting an illegal

search that leads to discovery of illegal drugs in their cars even

without being drunk, but just speeding. Both the illegal

interrogation and the physical evidence would be disregarded.

Another scenario is when a law enforcement officer coerces a

criminal defendant to confess, for instance when the officer

obtains a search warrant based on the confession of a located

weapon used in a crime. The weapon and the confession would

not be admitted as they would be the fruits of the poisonous tree.

Burial Speech

Explain to the new investigators the idea behind the court's

displeasure with issues like the Christian Burial Speech. What

might it mean in the long run to a serious case just as it did

with Brewer v. Williams? 

In understanding the Christian Burial Speech, it is important to

note some important events that took laces. William abducted a

ten-year-old girl from Iowa (Des Moines) and was charged after

an arrest in Iowa (Davenport) for the abduction (Kamisar, 2018).

Des Moines’ law enforcement officers had to retrieve Williams

in Davenport (Kamisar, 2018). Furthermore, they were under

strict instructions not to question Williams till his attorney was

present. However, ones of the officers convinced Williams

during the drive to Des Moines to talk about the crime and

where the girl was. Eventually, Williams directed the police to

the girl’s body (Kamisar, 2018). Though the evidence collected

was overwhelming, the reliability of the fact-finding process

became a challenge and hence the respondent necessarily went

free. Indeed, in the long run, the courts shall be forced to uphold

all the laws and rules even if it is a serious case.

Conscious of the Court Test

Explain the types of behavior that may result in the application

of the Shocking the Conscience of the Court test. Provide at

least 1 scenario as demonstrative instruction. 

Coercion is the use of physical or moral force to compel a

person to do something, or to abstain from doing something,

thereby depriving that person of the exercise of free will

(Gerstle,

2017). It is therefore a clear violation of the constitution since it

is not a product the accused’s free choice, for instance in the

cases of police-induced coercion, suspects end up admitting to

crimes they did not commit.

The fourth amendment is violated when physical coercion is

used to extract a statement, unreasonable search and seizure.

The statement and its fruits are excludable from trial pursuant to

the ordinary workings of the exclusionary rule. The act of

coercion may include extortion, blackmail, torture, threats to

induce favors, or even sexual assault. All these are considered as

a duress crime in law and are used as leverage, to force the

victims to act in away contrary to their own interests.

Coercion

Provide instruction that coercion is a clear violation of the

Constitution. What areas are violated, and what types of

behavior are considered coercion? Conscious of the court test is

an aspect that is applied when sharing the assets between a

divorcing couple. The fundamental law applied in most courts is

the 50/50 basis, implying that the Net Family Property should be

shared equally(Mechoulan, 2016). However, some behavior

results in the application of shocking the conscience of the court

test. The family assets are not necessarily shared on a 50/50

basis.

Some of these behaviors include; when one of the spouses fails

to unveil liabilities and debts incurred before marriage. The

concealed debts would not be justifiable to be paid using the

joint family assets. This behavior is evident in the case between

Roseneck v. Gowling. Moreover, when a spouse has incurred

gambling debts. Furthermore, when debts are incurred with

escort services and at bars. When a spouse also conceals

winnings from the lottery shortly before the divorce from the

other partner. In the behaviors discussed, it would shock the

court’s conscience to allow equal sharing of the family assets.

 References

Baier, W., Warnett, J. M., Payne, M., & Williams, M. A.

(2018). Introducing 3D printed models as demonstrative

evidence at criminal trials. Journal of forensic sciences, 63(4),

1298-1302.

Calabresi, G. (2013). The exclusionary rule. Harv. JL &

Pub. Pol'y, 26, 111.

 Gerstle, G. (2017). Liberty and Coercion. Princeton

University Press.

Journal of Legal Studies, 35(1), 143-174.

Kamisar, Y. (2018). Brewer v. Williams, Massiah, and

Miranda: What Is Interrogation-When Does It Matter. Geo.

LJ, 67, 1.

Lemley, M. A. (2017). The Fruit of the Poisonous Tree in

IP Law. Iowa L. Rev., 103, 245.

Mechoulan, S. (2016). Divorce laws and the structure of the

American family. The